§ 13.39

KSTP-TV v. Metropolitan Council · 2016 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

In Re Glaxosmithkline Plc. · 2007 9 citations

+ 9 more citations in this opinion.

In re GlaxoSmithKline plc · 2007 9 citations

+ 9 more citations in this opinion.

In Re GlaxoSmithKline Plc · 2005 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Westrom v. Minnesota Department of Labor & Industry · 2004 17 citations

+ 17 more citations in this opinion.

Navarre v. South Washington County Schools · 2002 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Wiegel v. City of St. Paul · 2002 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

St. Peter Herald v. City of St. Peter · 1993 3 citations

+ 3 more citations in this opinion.

Montgomery Ward & Co. v. County of Hennepin · 1990 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Kristina Jean Powers v. Superintendent James Freihammer, in his official capacity · 2016 5 citations

not set forth a legally sufficient claim that respondents had violated Minn. Stat. § 13.39,

not set forth a legally sufficient claim that respondents had violated Minn. Stat. § 13.39,

not set forth a legally sufficient claim that respondents had violated Minn. Stat. § 13.39,

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Uckun v. Minnesota State Board of Medical Practice · 2007 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

In Re GlaxoSmithKline Plc · 2006 11 citations

+ 11 more citations in this opinion.

In re Glaxosmithkline plc · 2006 11 citations

+ 11 more citations in this opinion.

Westrom v. Minnesota Department of Labor & Industry · 2003 9 citations

+ 9 more citations in this opinion.

Star Tribune v. Minnesota Twins Partnership · 2003 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

City Pages v. State · 2003 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Washington v. Independent School District No. 625 · 2000 3 citations

Minn. Stat. § 13.39, subd. 2 (1998), provides that data collected by a political subdivision in anticipation of or to defend a civil action are “protected nonpublic data.” Data in this category are “not accessible to the subject of the data.” Minn. Stat. § 13.02, subd. 13 (1998). The district court ruled that the data Washington sought “was collected in anticipation of pending civil actions and is nonpublic.” Washington does not challenge this ruling on appeal.

Minn. Stat. § 13.39, subd. 2 (1998), provides that data collected by a political subdivision in anticipation of or to defend a civil action are “protected nonpublic data.” Data in this category are “not accessible to the subject of the data.” Minn. Stat. § 13.02, subd. 13 (1998). The district court ruled that the data Washington sought “was collected in anticipation of pending civil actions and is nonpublic.” Washington does not challenge this ruling on appeal.

Minn. Stat. § 13.39, subd. 2 (1998), provides that data collected by a political subdivision in anticipation of or to defend a civil action are “protected nonpublic data.” Data in this category are “not accessible to the subject of the data.” Minn. Stat. § 13.02, subd. 13 (1998). The district court ruled that the data Washington sought “was collected in anticipation of pending civil actions and is nonpublic.” Washington does not challenge this ruling on appeal.

Everest Development, Ltd. v. City of Roseville · 1997 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Deli v. Hasselmo · 1996 4 citations

+ 4 more citations in this opinion.

St. Peter Herald v. City of St. Peter · 1992 14 citations

+ 14 more citations in this opinion.

McDevitt v. Tilson · 1990 3 citations

+ 3 more citations in this opinion.

State v. Hopperstad · 1985 2 citations

The State contends that reports in the file are protected under the state Data Practices Act, since they were not prepared for the criminal charge but for any civil action which might be filed. Minn. Stat. § 13.39, subd. 2 (1982), reads:

The State contends that reports in the file are protected under the state Data Practices Act, since they were not prepared for the criminal charge but for any civil action which might be filed. Minn. Stat. § 13.39, subd. 2 (1982), reads:

Evans v. Krook · 2022 6 citations

+ 6 more citations in this opinion.